Prosecution evidence?

[Eleanor]

It is necessary in law to prove that someone did something Without Reasonable Doubt.  The doubts in this case are manifold.  And there was No Evidence.
Confessions are not acceptable in Portugal unless repeated in Court, which they were not.
Whether or not one or both of them did it is irrelevant.  They should never have been convicted.

[John]

im going on the evidence...thats the most important thing....and you have to admit, as this paper says..there is no real evidence

The confession by João and the admission by Leonor herself in January 2009 are good enough for me.  After all, they are the only people who know the truth. The village folk might have their own thoughts but that's all they are, thoughts.

Leonor has had a long time to consider her position and decided to come clean, hopefully João will do the same one day and reveal where Joana really is.

[John]

It is necessary in law to prove that someone did something Without Reasonable Doubt.  The doubts in this case are manifold.  And there was No Evidence.
Confessions are not acceptable in Portugal unless repeated in Court, which they were not.
Whether or not one or both of them did it is irrelevant.  They should never have been convicted.

Please stop posting erroneous information Eleanor. 

Fact: The judges allowed the prosecution to play João's tape recorded confession at the trial.  The jury thus heard his confession, they made the decision to convict and it is not for you to undermine that decision since you weren't there.

[Angelo222]

It is necessary in law to prove that someone did something Without Reasonable Doubt.  The doubts in this case are manifold.  And there was No Evidence.
Confessions are not acceptable in Portugal unless repeated in Court, which they were not.
Whether or not one or both of them did it is irrelevant.  They should never have been convicted.

Haven't you learned anything yet?   Leonor has spoken through the medium of her lawyer and made a signed deposition.   She admits the girl was killed after a failed attempt to sell her.  Evidence is not an issue in this case any more Eleanor.

[Carana]

The confession by João and the admission by Leonor herself in January 2009 are good enough for me.  After all, they are the only people who know the truth. The village folk might have their own thoughts but that's all they are, thoughts.

Leonor has had a long time to consider her position and decided to come clean, hopefully João will do the same one day and reveal where Joana really is.

If either knew where she was, a body would presumably have been found by now. There are cases in which people have buried a body and couldn't find them... but I haven't found anything credible in this case that they had the faintest idea aside from "leads" generated via "robust" questioning.

[Eleanor]

Please stop posting erroneous information Eleanor. 

Fact: The judges allowed the prosecution to play João's tape recorded confession at the trial.  The jury thus heard his confession, they made the decision to convict and it is not for you to undermine that decision since you weren't there.

According to Montclair confessions in court are not admissible.  Or is she mistaken?  Both defendants pleaded not guilty.  So what is erroneous about my post?

Go and pick on someone else.  There are enough of them posting really erroneous information.

[Mr Moderator]

Haven't you learned anything yet?   Leonor has spoken through the medium of her lawyer and made a signed deposition.   She admits the girl was killed after a failed attempt to sell her.  Evidence is not an issue in this case any more Eleanor.

 Some people would be unconvinced even if she went on the Algarve evening news and confessed it all.

[Carana]

Some people would be unconvinced even if she went on the Algarve evening news and confessed it all.

If I'd found anything credible that this child died, I would have accepted it. So far, I haven't. Let alone anything to substantiate the bizarre prosecution hypothesis.

[Anna]

It is necessary in law to prove that someone did something Without Reasonable Doubt.  The doubts in this case are manifold.  And there was No Evidence.
Confessions are not acceptable in Portugal unless repeated in Court, which they were not.
Whether or not one or both of them did it is irrelevant.  They should never have been convicted.

The original confession on film was by Joao Not Leonora. The second Statement by Joao and Leonora were not accepted in the 2009 appeal... therefore the only standing confession is Joaos reconstruction film, because in 2009 appeal, Joao denied in court, writing and signing the document, however Leonor's remains on file and it is nothing new, It has been on here many times and many must have seen it...IMO t was a ploy by...... to shorten the sentence

Ps I forgot to add that this appeal with the confessions, which Joao denied writing ,was thrown out of court/Denied because of trickery used by the lawyer

[Mr Moderator]

If either knew where she was, a body would presumably have been found by now. There are cases in which people have buried a body and couldn't find them... but I haven't found anything credible in this case that they had the faintest idea aside from "leads" generated via "robust" questioning.

According to Leonor's latest version of events and notably, her confession, she claims it was her brother who disposed of the remains.  The question is, how could she be sure what happened since she is merely advancing a scenario advanced by her brother.  Unfortunately for Leonor, unless she was present when Joana was killed or disposed of her testimony is hearsay.

[John]

According to Montclair confessions in court are not admissible.  Or is she mistaken?  Both defendants pleaded not guilty.  So what is erroneous about my post?

Go and pick on someone else.  There are enough of them posting really erroneous information.

Confessions in court are most certainly admissible Eleanor, anything a defendant says is admissible. 

Are you not just a little bit confused since it is confessions made outside court which are not normally admissible UNLESS the judges say they are...as happened in this case.

[Mr Gray]

Haven't you learned anything yet?   Leonor has spoken through the medium of her lawyer and made a signed deposition.   She admits the girl was killed after a failed attempt to sell her.  Evidence is not an issue in this case any more Eleanor.

So what EXACTLY does the signed deposition say...because thats not what john reported

[Carana]

Confessions in court are most certainly admissible Eleanor, anything a defendant says is admissible. 

Are you not just a little bit confused since it is confessions made outside court which are not normally admissible UNLESS the judges say they are...as happened in this case.

Which confessions were deemed admissible during the murder trial?

[Eleanor]

Haven't you learned anything yet?   Leonor has spoken through the medium of her lawyer and made a signed deposition.   She admits the girl was killed after a failed attempt to sell her.  Evidence is not an issue in this case any more Eleanor.

So why was there a Trial?  And why did they plead Not Guilty.  Why was the Confession played in Court?  And why was she beaten so badly over a large number of hours?
Where exactly was Amaral while this was going on?  Or was he just having lunch?

Is anyone who doesn't agree with you and Admin, allowed to have an opinion?

I thought this Forum dealt with Miscarriages of Justice.  Is there any case apart from John's that is actually considered to be a Miscarriage of Justice?

[Eleanor]

Confessions in court are most certainly admissible Eleanor, anything a defendant says is admissible. 

Are you not just a little bit confused since it is confessions made outside court which are not normally admissible UNLESS the judges say they are...as happened in this case.

Exactly.  So why did the Judge decide that it was admissible when they both pleaded Not Guilty.?